If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Senate Republicans handed President Obama a significant defeat on Thursday in a filibuster vote that effectively blocks leftist Berkeley law Prof. Goodwin Liu from sitting on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Democrats failed to end the filibuster, which requires 60 votes, mostly along party lines of 52 to 43. Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to support Liu and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska was the only Democrat to oppose him.

“Clearly the Constitution would take a backseat in his courtroom,” said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky.)

“This is precisely the kind of judge we want to prevent from getting into the courtroom,” McConnell said. “His philosophy might be popular on left-wing campuses, but it has no business in a courtroom.”

Calling him an activist judge who is likely to treat the Constitution as a living, breathing document, Republicans said prior to the vote that they also opposed Liu based on his controversial criticisms of Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito during their confirmation process.

"Judge Alito's record envisions an America where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy to stop him from running away with a stolen purse, where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man ... this is not the America we know. Nor is it the America we aspire to be," Liu said.

In 2005, Liu criticized Roberts in a Bloomberg News article for belonging to the Republican National Lawyers Association and the National Legal Center for the Public Interest. Liu called the groups’ missions of free enterprise, private property ownership and limited government “code words for an ideological agenda hostile to environmental, workplace and consumer protections.”

Added Sen. Lindsey Graham (R.-S.C.): “These words were designed to destroy, and they ring of an ideologue. He should run for office, not be sitting on the court.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) called Liu’s comments “vicious” and “disgraceful.”

“He is a serious threat to the rule of law and principles that make this nation great,” Cornyn said.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I.-Conn. ) defended Liu’s comments, saying they had the “ring of a passionate litigator,” but later said he regretted them. Lieberman, along with other Democrats, made the case for Liu by focusing on his personal life—a story they called quintessentially American.

Liu’s parents emigrated from Taiwan to Sacramento. Although he has no experience as a judge or even a practicing lawyer, Liu clerked for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader.

“He is a star in everything he has ever done,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.). “If he doesn’t get his, it’s about politics,” Boxer said. “It says more about the people in this place than it does about Goodwin.”

If Liu had been confirmed, he would have become the first Asian-American to serve on the appeals bench, said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D.-Vt.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee. “He would bring much-needed diversity to the federal bench,” Leahy said.

Democrats weren’t as enthusiastic about confirming minorities to the bench during the previous Bush administration. The nomination of Miguel Estrada, who emigrated from Honduras, languished for two years under Democrat control of the Senate, and he eventually withdrew his name for consideration to an appellate court.

Exactly. When they pulled this - there was no precedent and now there is. Oh and ONE compared to how many was it again under Bush? There were a dozen or so they block via filibuster under bush right? Blocked despite Bipartisan support for their appointments.

ETA - The senate filibustered 28 Bush judicial appointments - in 5 of those cases the filibuster was over come - leaving 23 judges blocked via filibuster by the dems.

I think a more likely explanation is that Republicans no longer oppose the filibuster of judicial nominees now that they are in the minority. They should probably thank McCain and a few others for preventing the so-called "Constitutional" Option while they were in the majority.

Look, we won’t always be on the majority. I say to my conservative friends, some day there will be a liberal Democrat president and a liberal Democrat Congress. Why? Because history shows it goes back and forth. I don’t know if it’s a hundred years from now, but it will happen. And do we want a bunch of liberal judges approved by the Senate of the United States with 51 votes if the Democrats are in the majority?

~ John McCain explaining why he would not vote for the so-called Nuclear Option